It’s high time to highlight recent news on climate change, and the first article is from Phys.Org regarding the dreaded ozone hole. This is interesting because I mentioned in October how this topic, once a favorite of climate alarmists, has disappeared. Despite their doomsday predictions, the ozone layer is still there, the hole is the smallest on record, and life on earth has not gone extinct.
But the article from Phys.Org provides a clever rescuing agent for climate alarmists. They’re claiming victory for saving the ozone layer and slowing the rate of global warming! Yes, they’re invoking the 1987 Montreal Protocol and arguing that the treaty was much more successful than they could have possibly imagined.
Honestly, with over fifty years of failed predictions, I’ve always wondered why the alarmists haven’t used this strategy more often; I’ve assumed they never wanted to admit that things aren’t nearly as bad as they promised. But since the size of the ozone hole can’t be denied, and the record has been widely reported, there seems to be a need to respond, so it’s not surprising that this propaganda study came out in a timely fashion.
For one, they claim the Earth will be at least one degree cooler than it would be without the protocol, and, two, they argue that the Kyoto Agreement is credited with reducing temperatures by 0.12 degrees Celsius.
The trick is they had to use computer models in order to make these claims, and then present it as fact. But, of course, they don’t explain the limitations of computer models; long-range simulations are unreliable, and there’s no way to substantiate their claims, and we’re expected to simply accept the results by faith.
This, however, may be a good strategy because many people won’t question the results. If alarmists can successfully convince enough people that these treaties and protocols are working, then maybe they can successfully demand more treaties so that life on earth doesn’t go extinct.
My take: don’t fall prey to computer model predictions or alarmism. The models have poor track records, and the worst-case scenarios are always cherry picked to maximize fear.
The next article is from Discover Magazine on the subject of shrinking birds, and they say climate change is to blame!
For over 40 years, researchers have recorded and analyzed over 70,000 dead birds in Chicago (52 different species), and have discovered that the overall body size shrank, while the wingspan increased.
Now, we don’t know for certain what is driving these changes, but the researchers aren’t about to let this opportunity go without exploiting it, and they “suggest” it’s the climate. Why? Because, as a general rule, animals in colder climates are larger than their counterparts in warmer climates. Therefore, they reason, since the birds are shrinking, it must be because the climate is getting warmer!
Needless to say, there could be other, more logical reasons for these changes, and I’m glad they admit migratory factors could be it. But they simply don’t have enough data to make the claim that climate change is responsible. I find that irresponsible. The bottom line is that nobody knows, and without evidence to back up their claims, they shouldn’t jump to conclusions.
The next article from Discover Magazine is about sea level rise, and it foretells of yet more doom and gloom. Climate change has reached the “point of no return”, they say, and our only hope is more government. Researchers claim that sea levels will rise 65 feet due to melting sea ice, and this time the culprit is carbon dioxide- an element beneficial to plants and life on earth, and not a pollutant.
It’s worth noting that none of us will be alive to disprove their claims because it will take centuries, they say, for sea levels to rise that high. But even if they’re right, they admit that humans will have time to adapt. And that’s a valid point. I’m convinced they’re wrong about the rise of sea level, but I’ve always maintained that God created humans to be adaptable, so we shouldn’t fear such change. Especially since scientists claim sea levels were once 115 feet higher about 3 million years ago.
Lastly, I find it tragic that Time Magazine has named Greta Thunberg as their Person of the Year. They’re using this young girl for propaganda purposes to promote a political cause.
The bottom line is that none of the doom and gloom fearmongering is necessary because climate change is based on faulty computer models that can’t be substantiated by the scientific method. As we review decades of predictions, we see a record of failure, and we can be just as certain that future predictions will be equally unsuccessful. No one should fear true climate change or blame humans; it’s a natural process, and we can adapt if necessary.